On 14/8/08 15:27, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:11 +0100, Sacha wrote:

snip
Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Another one to add to your collection of garden gnomes, that live under the
ornamental Scandinavian bridge, Sacha?

Another one trying to lead me into trouble.......! ;-)

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

On 14/8/08 16:07, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:04:27 +0100, Sacha wrote:

On 14/8/08 15:27, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:11 +0100, Sacha wrote:

snip
Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Another one to add to your collection of garden gnomes, that live under the
ornamental Scandinavian bridge, Sacha?

Another one trying to lead me into trouble.......! ;-)

Far too much temptation for an innocent young woman with green fingers.

Young............I seem to remember that......innocent is far too long ago!
;-)
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

On Aug 14, 2:29*pm, Sacha wrote:

Now Gordon, you're bringing grievances here that do not belong in this
group. *Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Bravo, the last thing we want on urg is dissent, we have had that,
fortunately only in small bursts in the past. I know that all of us
urglers do not want that sort of thing again, we all get on well, and
many of us know each other in real life. I am not interested in
fights on other groups, I don't want to see it mentioned here.

Judith

On Aug 14, 3:27*pm, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:11 +0100, Sacha wrote:

snip

*Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Another one to add to your collection of garden gnomes, that live under the
ornamental Scandinavian bridge, Sacha?
--

Martin

lol - you obviously write for Frank Muir? :-)

Judith

On Aug 14, 4:07*pm, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:04:27 +0100, Sacha wrote:
On 14/8/08 15:27, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:11 +0100, Sacha wrote:

snip
*Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Another one to add to your collection of garden gnomes, that live under the
ornamental Scandinavian bridge, Sacha?

Another one trying to lead me into trouble.......! *;-)

Far too much temptation for an innocent young woman with green fingers.
--

Martin

Talking 'bout me or Sacha lol

Judith

On Aug 14, 8:52*pm, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:57:54 -0700 (PDT), Judith in France





wrote:
On Aug 14, 4:07*pm, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:04:27 +0100, Sacha wrote:
On 14/8/08 15:27, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:29:11 +0100, Sacha wrote:

snip
*Please let's not do that in urg! Otherwise your typo will not appear
to be a typo, will it? ;-)

Another one to add to your collection of garden gnomes, that live under the
ornamental Scandinavian bridge, Sacha?

Another one trying to lead me into trouble.......! *;-)

Far too much temptation for an innocent young woman with green fingers..
--

Martin

Talking 'bout me or Sacha lol

Yes.
--

Martin- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You'll marry both of us then? :-)

Judith

On 14/8/08 20:52, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 11:57:54 -0700 (PDT), Judith in France
wrote:

On Aug 14, 4:07*pm, Martin wrote:
On Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:04:27 +0100, Sacha wrote:
snip

Another one trying to lead me into trouble.......! *;-)

Far too much temptation for an innocent young woman with green fingers.
--

Martin

Talking 'bout me or Sacha lol

Yes.

Tsk! No discrimination! ;-)
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

In article ,
says...

FOR THE GOOGLE ARCHIVE wrote in message
...
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:33:07 +0100, K wrote:

Pete Stockdale writes


[QUOTED IN FULL FOR GOOGLE ARCHIVE PURPOSES]



For the second time !

But you didn't, did you. You snipped it. I'm not sure what point you're
trying to make, but you're not succeeding. Instead we've gained a troll
who thinks it's fab to repost everything. All that will happen if all
posts are reposted by someone is that the newsgroup will get clogged up
and people will stop posting at all. The group will then die, and no
archiving will be required at all.

"PK" wrote in message
...

"Pete Stockdale" wrote in message
...

I consider snipping to be more offensive than repeating the original post
unless it was of an oversize or offensive nature.


1. Failure to snip wastes my time

Snipping wastes the poster's time.

You don't have to read the whole post.

"Pete Stockdale" wrote in message
...

"Sacha" wrote in message
...

In this group, it's usually quite easy to snip the irrelevant bits from a
post because it's so often a specific question or answer that matters and
that can be isolated. On other groups that might not be the case.
Personally, I prefer this group's custom of snipping because trawling
through yards of old material to read one sentence at the end is
irritating
and silly. In the end, I find I avoid posts from the people who do that.
So, obviously my opinion is different to yours but that's the way of
newsgroups, too.

--
Fairly stated - back to glasshouse for me then.

I'll see you in there :-)

Mary

On 15/8/08 09:27, in article ,
"Mary Fisher" wrote:
snip

Snipping wastes the poster's time.

You don't have to read the whole post.


I think that's making the assumption that your time is worth more than my
time, which it is not, to me, especially if I have to scroll through inches
of verbiage just to see if there's anything worth reading at the end of it.
I don't mean you personally, Mary but the non-snipper versus the snipper.
It's rather like people who are always late but who appear to think they're
so busy and important others will wait around for them. I don't do that and
I don't read people who fail to snip irrelevant material.


--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon

"Sacha" wrote in message
...

I think that's making the assumption that your time is worth more than my
time, which it is not, to me, especially if I have to scroll through
inches
of verbiage just to see if there's anything worth reading at the end of
it.
I don't mean you personally, Mary but the non-snipper versus the snipper.
It's rather like people who are always late but who appear to think
they're
so busy and important others will wait around for them. I don't do that
and
I don't read people who fail to snip irrelevant material.



Good Morning - Sunny here again !

But who is to judge what is irrelevant material irrelevant material ?
The writer presumably does not think it is irrelevant.

Regards
Pete
www.thecanalshop.com

"Mary Fisher" wrote in message
t...


--
Fairly stated - back to glasshouse for me then.

I'll see you in there :-)

Too hot again !
But thanks for the offer all the same.

Pete

"Pete Stockdale" wrote in message
...

But who is to judge what is irrelevant material irrelevant material ?


the person drafting the reply - to make clear the specific point being
addressed.

pk

On 15/8/08 10:16, in article , "Pete
Stockdale" wrote:
snip

But who is to judge what is irrelevant material irrelevant material ?
The writer presumably does not think it is irrelevant.


Not irrelevant, merely what has been posted already and is then repeated
many times to no purpose, other than clogging up the system.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.com
South Devon